Re: [darcs-users] so long and thanks for all the darcs

On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 2:46 AM, Ben Franksen wrote: >> There are a few other quibbles, like how obliterate -O is too slow to >> be useful, > > (perhaps we should have made --no-minimize the default?) Is that what you get when you ^C while it's working? If so, yeah I'd

Re: [darcs-users] so long and thanks for all the darcs

On Sun, 4 Mar 2018 23:23:33 +0100 Ben Franksen wrote: > What made me re-consider > the idea was that I found I like the way mercurial automatically > creates a branch when you pull a conflicting patch. > But > when you look at it from a darcs viewpoint, automatically

Re: [darcs-users] so long and thanks for all the darcs

Am 04.03.2018 um 21:12 schrieb Karl O. Pinc: > On Sun, 4 Mar 2018 12:04:01 +0100 > Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > >> * no branches. Don't add them! The one-branch-per-repo model is much >> better > > Thinking out loud here. > > If I had to vote today I'd say: > > -1 on

Re: [darcs-users] so long and thanks for all the darcs

On Sat, Mar 03, 2018 at 05:54:48PM -0800, Evan Laforge wrote a message of 45 lines which said: > I recently switched my main project from darcs to git. > > I'm mentioning it because I feel like it might be one of the larger > and older darcs repos out there, with the

Re: [darcs-users] so long and thanks for all the darcs

Am 04.03.2018 um 05:03 schrieb Karl O. Pinc: > On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 18:36:32 -0800 > Evan Laforge wrote: > >> On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 6:26 PM, Karl O. Pinc wrote: >>> This being so, I'm curious why a darcs user would choose >>> git over mercurial. >> >>